Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnly and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: results are one page at a time and continuation requires feeding next_max_id back in. It omits page size and rate-limit behavior, but the pagination contract is the critical disclosure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight clauses with the pagination instruction and alternative routing front-loaded; every sentence earns its place with zero filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained. Purpose, pagination mechanics, and sibling routing are all covered, so nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds workflow meaning beyond the schema by tying max_id to a prior response's next_max_id and framing name as a brand-browse key. This is more than restating field types.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fetch one page of Poshmark listing records browsed by brand name') and scopes it precisely as a paginated browse. It also names the two sibling tools it is not, so the agent can discriminate without opening schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit routing: poshmark_brands to discover brand names and poshmark_search for keyword search. The continuation instruction ('pass the prior response's next_max_id as max_id to continue') tells the agent exactly how to paginate through this specific tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.